There is so much that the US has to contend with in times of war. Most recently, not only does the United States have worry about putting itself in better fiscal condition, it has to keep an eye on different countries in the world such as Afghanistan and Pakistan to make sure that no terrorist attacks take place again on its native soil.
Safeguards have been put into place to protect United States citizens, such as the passing of the Patriot Act. Yet, one does wonder what have the United States sacrificed to gain protection.Did the US have to sacrifice portions of its democratic process in the name of consistency and effectiveness in the time of war or was America’s democratic process able to overcome the strategic inconsistencies that arose during times of war in tact and prevail? When evaluating the Bush Presidency, one may say that there were portions of the democratic process or liberties that were sacrificed to get better protection for the country. One such sacrifice given is the submission to the Patriot Act signed by Bush 11 days after 9/11.In its renewal, Bush stated to USA TODAY “The Patriot Act defends our liberty” and “The best way to secure our homeland is to stay on the offensive against the terrorist network” (USA Today 2004). The Patriot Act allows what some refer to as eavesdropping on unsuspecting persons who may be considered possible threats to the US government.
Not only can persons be listened to in conversation, but can also be searched and detained without a charge or a definite release date. These measures may appear harsh but have benefited us in some ways.Even with the Patriot Act, there is no dictatorship in the United States. We as citizens enjoy most of the same freedoms that we have always had. Having a conversation listened to for some, is a small price to pay in order to maintain freedom.
For others, the price the US citizen has to pay is too great. Not only does the Patriot Act affect those who are suspected terrorists, but persons who immigrate to the US to gain a better life. Presupposing that a person is or may be a terrorist can harm relations within and outside of the US.Yet, when evaluating the actions that President Bush took, it was a little inconvenience that protected the public as a whole. To the country, this was not a sacrifice but an action that was taken to protect the US as a whole, just as FDR did in 1942.
When considering the actions that Franklin D. Roosevelt took during his time in office, it is clear to see that he was confronted with some difficult issues, just as President Bush was. However, FDR did not have to contend with things such as the internet and cell phones which allow those who are trying to hurt the US to communicate.He did, however, decide to take certain actions to protect the US.
President Roosevelt had some US citizens detained for the sake of national security. The premise was that “rights should yield to the necessity of war” (Biddle 1962). In other words, there were some things that had to be sacrificed or surrendered to protect the US. Although these persons were later proven to not have posed a threat to the US, it was a necessary evil in order to make sure that the US as a whole was protected. At that time, there were those who did not like the decision made by Roosevelt. This decision also hurt some US citizens.
When the conflict ended, the people overall were content in knowing that the President did what he felt was needed to protect and defend the US. There are those who do not care for similar decisions made by President Bush. However, in hind sight it may be viewed as a needed measure to assure that those who inhabit the US are safe and secure. It may not be perfect by any means.
However, it was needed and it is that needed measure that has afforded this country its freedoms. Democracy has won over after all. Sacrificing a small right is not a large sacrifice, as long as it secures us in totality.
